FICS Teamleague

Board

Teamleague Forum

Playoff ExtensionProposalsIndex ->

posted at 2012-12-10 17:00 by yaro

Hello, TL staffers. I've recently discussed with my teammates about the possibility of extending playoff rounds.

I feel that jumping straight from regular season into finals is rushed. At least one pre-championship round should be played. I'm not familiar with the goings-on of the other sections, but section Fischer is treated to the same two teams ("Flaming Fighters Flame," "Rainbow Azul") battling for the title. I am aware that even with an extended playoff round, the above-mentioned squads may very well battle again; they certainly earn their spots. Regardless, other underdog teams who post impressive results should not be ignored e.g. TL 52's "TheHotRock." (Fischer section).

One of the major appeals of sports is that championships are not guaranteed to teams that produce the best regular season results, but to those who exhibit grace and poise during crunch time. The lesser rated teams are shut down before they're given a chance to shine.

Here are my propositions:

Scenario 1: No 1 seed is granted automatic qualifier to the finals. No 2 & No 3 seeds play either a full round playoff or a one game playoff between selected players. Winner rightfully plays No 1 seed for final.----Quick & zippy. One, two, Kalamazoo.

Scenario 2: Top 4 seeds enter playoffs. No 1 vs No 4; No 2 vs No 3. Winners of each round face off in final.----Upsets happen, don't they? Otherwise, the term "upset" would not exist.

Are either of my propositions feasible?

Thanks for hearing me out. Take care.


Yaro

posted at 2012-12-12 03:14 by leifpetersen

I don't agree with this. I don't generally like playoffs, because they more or less void the regular season, and extend the tournament "unnecessarily" to achieve some drama.

Currently I think we have the best of both worlds. Currently we get an extra round of drama, but still the regular season counts very much with the no 1 seed getting draw odds.

posted at 2012-12-12 04:01 by leifpetersen

Speaking of playoffs, I think that we pay a heavy price for them today, because there are no extensions in the last regular round due to them, leading to many set draws.

I would rather have the extensions and be without playoffs, or have a bye round before playoffs.

posted at 2012-12-12 10:20 by Yaro

LeifPetersen:

Thanks for responding.

The purpose of additional playoff rounds is not to "achieve some drama." It's to allow deserving teams other than the stacked ones to shine. Why play through seven rounds if the same two teams guarantee their spot in the final before the first one? Isn't that deflating to the spirits of everyone else?


Yaro

posted at 2012-12-12 11:51 by leifpetersen

I basically think that if teams prove themselves best (time after time) in a full tournament, then they are the right champions.

I think it would be deflating for a team to win the long regular season and then lose to the 4th seed in the playoffs due to a fluke.

posted at 2012-12-12 13:29 by Yaro

LeifPetersen:

The 90's-early 00s Atlanta Braves and the 00s Dallas Mavericks would agree with you. The teams that prevented them from winning titles a gazillion times would not.

posted at 2012-12-14 23:36 by Funkmaus

Upsets almost never happen in Fischer-Section - as we can see in regular season.
T49, T50, T51 and T52 we have the same matchup.
Other teams are playing for place 3: and it is an achievement.
Congrats to Rocks!

posted at 2012-12-20 22:35 by smallblackcat

There are two logistical issues that come up if we were to extend the playoffs.

Firstly, the semi-final round would have to be played without extensions, as is the case with round 7 at the moment. It is preferable to have all games played in a round where the stakes are at their highest, which is why the playoffs/finals are currently given an extension period, but that would not be possible for a semi-final round.

Secondly, this would add an extra week to the length of each tourney. Or alternatively, we could remove the extension period for the finals, and keep to roughly the same length. In practice, a 10-week tourney (7 regular rounds, 2 playoff rounds, 1 week of extensions at the end) would mean only a 3-week turnaround between tourneys. This is simply not possible.

If we were to extend the length of tourneys, the way to do it would be to reduce to 3 tourneys per year. This was sort of discussed in this forum post earlier in the year:

http://teamleague.org/board.php?page=board&action=topicshow&forumid=357&forum=T51&topic=Isn%27t+TL+arranged+too+fast+nowadays%3F&topicid=372

I was hoping to see some more responses before posting myself, to try to gauge popular opinion. I would still like to see more opinions on this issue, or any alternative suggestions to make TL more exciting and competitive. I'm not opposed to any change, so long as it is practical to implement.

posted at 2012-12-21 11:06 by bythecliff

I think it would be a good idea to reduce the number of tourneys played per year. That way, it will be easier for both the participants and the organizers. 3 TLs a year seems like a good pace.

posted at 2012-12-24 12:52 by Yaro

Everything rests on whether people enjoy competing. If adding extra rounds is not a practical solution, I completely understand.

A reminder: I also suggested a 9 round tourney, where #1 seeded is automatically placed into the final, while #2 and #3 seeds battle for a finals spot. The semifinal round could just be one game, between two chosen players from each squad. If the game is drawn, the match could be decided in a rapid or blitz tie-break. Is this proposition more practical?

Thanks for listening. Keep up the good work organizing TL. Happy holidays!

posted at 2012-12-24 17:13 by smallblackcat

Same issue either way. An extra round means an extra week of play, which is impractical if we are running 4 tourneys per year. With 3 per year, extended playoffs would be possible.

I sense there isn't great enthusiasm for a change, but am willing to be proved wrong if more people want to weigh-in with their opinions. There will be a TD's meeting before the next tourney, and I'll gladly put this issue up for discussion.

posted at 2012-12-24 23:05 by Yaro

Smallblackcat:

I expected more people to weigh in on this topic. The silence seems to confirm, as you say, that people are not enthusiastic for change. People just want to play, regardless of standings--- and I'm cool with that. But go ahead and bring up the issue at the TD meeting. Doesn't hurt to see where the TL honchos stand regarding it. Thanks for taking the time for discussion with me.

Yaro

posted at 2013-01-01 13:11 by wmahan

I just wanted to say thanks for the proposal. Although we decided not to adopt it, that doesn't mean it was inherently a bad idea. It's always hard to make a change due to inertia, and as you noted, most people just want to play.

posted at 2013-01-02 12:26 by Yaro

At least I can sleep well knowing I tried :-) Happy holidays!

posted at 2013-01-02 20:34 by jaberwock

Yaro (and others),

Suggestions such as extended playoffs were rationally discussed and not dismissed out of hand;

Teamleague has continued to evolve, and I would not be surprised if further changes take place in the future.

In the meantime, thanks for your input!

jaberwock

posted at 2013-03-13 01:16 by PankracyRozumek

Hi Yaro,

Your wish of having other team than RW or FPF in the playoff of the Fischer section has been fulfilled without any rule change. Well done! :)

MichaĂ…‚

posted at 2013-03-21 14:12 by Yaro

Lol. Great job, guys. And I didn't even have to call a lawyer.